Oddbean new post about | logout
▲ ▼
tohrxyz | 5 months ago (raw) | root | parent | reply | flag +2 
 you see thats where am not really sure how to approach this.

because on one hand you dont wanna be dictator who says what people can and cannot do on the protocol.

but on the other hand, you have to have some direction and people who fight for that in your protocol, so it doesnt fall into the wrong hands.

therefore i understand why putting data instead of purely monetary transactions into bitcoin can be bad for money sovereinghty, but also dont like the idea of someone deciding whats good and what isnt in this supposedly free money network.
▲ ▼
Bored Satoshi | 5 months ago (raw) | root | parent | reply | flag +1 
 This is how Bitcoin is built. Built to enable these things. Something that is not financial for you could be financial for someone else. 

When SegWit and Taproot were introduced, did the core devs anticipate these problems? Why did they not see this as an attack vector back then? Because it is not. 

This not an attack on Bitcoin. Runes and Ordinals obey the bitcoin protocol, they do not lead to double spends, 51% attacks, or any of the problems Satoshi built Bitcoin to solve. 

This is not an attack just because this new usecase leads to higher fees for vanilla Bitcoin transactions. It is a zero sum game that will slow soon. But people will find ways to make this more useful. Ahahaha